A persistent question in Christian theology is this: Should Christians still keep the Old Testament law, or did Jesus abolish it when He died on the cross? This topic has sparked much debate, especially when interpreting New Testament passages that seem to pull in different directions. However, Jesus’ own words in Matthew 5 provide a strong foundation for understanding how He viewed the law and what that means for His followers.

What Is the Old Testament Law?

When Christians refer to the “Old Testament law,” they’re speaking about what Scripture often calls the Law of God or the Law of Moses. These laws, given through Moses, are recorded in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy and are also known as the Torah (Hebrew for “instruction” or “law”).

The Torah includes commands like:

  • Resting on the Sabbath (the seventh day),

  • Avoiding unclean foods such as pork and shellfish,

  • And moral directives like “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Leviticus 19:18).

Historically, the people of Israel were expected to obey these laws as a covenantal response to God’s salvation.

Did Jesus Abolish the Law?

Some Christians claim that Jesus abolished the Old Testament law at the cross, rendering it obsolete. But is that what Jesus taught in Matthew 5? Jesus directly addresses this issue in Matthew 5:17-20:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”
— Matthew 5:17 (ESV)

The Greek word translated as “abolish” (kataluō) means “to nullify or render void.” Jesus clearly states that His mission was not to nullify the law.

But what does He mean by “fulfill”? Some, like pastor Andy Stanley, argue that by fulfilling the law, Jesus rendered it functionally obsolete. However, that interpretation poses a problem: How can “fulfilling” something result in the same outcome as “abolishing” it? That would make Jesus’ statement logically inconsistent.

A Better Interpretation: Fulfill or Bring to Full Expression

Biblical scholars, such as Dr. Carmen Imes, argue that Jesus “fulfilled” the law by bringing it to its full expression, rather than ending it. He demonstrated and taught its true intent. This interpretation aligns with the rest of the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus clarifies the deeper moral implications of laws against murder, adultery, and other offenses, not discarding them but rather intensifying their significance.

The Law’s Ongoing Relevance

Jesus further emphasizes the permanence of the law in Matthew 5:18:

“For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”

This statement clearly establishes that the law remains relevant until the end of the age. In verse 19, Jesus even warns against relaxing any of the commandments, equating such actions with being “least in the kingdom of heaven.”

What About Paul?

Critics might point to the Apostle Paul, who often speaks of Christians not being “under the law” and even suggest that Paul is contradicting Jesus in claiming that the law should still be upheld in Matthew 5:18. For example:

  • “You are not under law but under grace” (Romans 6:14)

  • “If you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law” (Galatians 5:18)

However, Paul also says:

  • “I delight in the law of God” (Romans 7:22)

  • “We uphold the law” (Romans 3:31)

So which is it? Well, Dr J.A. Overman writes; 

“Although this passage is the subject of lively controversy, it is unambiguous and does indeed command obedience to the whole Torah.” (Pg . 78). 

Reconciling Paul with Jesus

As Dr. Daniel Block explains, Paul’s criticisms target legalistic distortions of the law, where people treat it as a means of earning salvation, rather than a response to grace. Paul opposed the misuse of the Torah, not the Torah itself. He writes; 

“In Romans and Galatians, Paul’s argumentation addresses those who would pervert the ‘law’ (a narrow legalistic interpretation of Hebrew Torah) into a means of salvation, rather than treating it as a response to salvation as Moses perceived it. While on the surface, Paul’s response to this heresy often appears to contradict Moses, these statements should be interpreted in context and as rhetorical responses to his opponents. In his own disposition toward the “law,” he was in perfect step with Moses: obedience to the law was not a means for gaining salvation but a willing and grateful response to salvation already received.”  (Pg.3)

When properly understood, Paul and Jesus are in full agreement: the law is not the means to salvation, but a framework for holy living in response to God’s grace.

Conclusion: The Law Still Matters

So, did Jesus do away with the law? The clear answer from Matthew 5:17–20 is: No. Jesus affirmed the law’s relevance, called His followers to uphold even its smallest commands, and warned against relaxing them. As Dr. Imes summarizes:

“Jesus does not do away with the Old Testament law. He calls people back to it—and He holds them to it.” (Pg 143). 

While there are difficult passages in Paul’s letters, sound interpretation principles urge us to read those in light of explicit texts, not the other way around. At the end of the day, Jesus’ teachings call us not to discard the law but to live it out rightly—with transformed hearts, empowered by grace.

Sources:

  • Imes, Carmen Joy. Bearing God’s Name: Why Sinai Still Matters. InterVarsity Press, 2019.

  • Block, Daniel I. The Gospel according to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy. Cascade Books, 2012.

  • Overman, J. Andrew. Church and Community in Crisis: The Gospel according to Matthew. Trinity Press Int.  1996.